​Statement of Principles and CAPD Diagnostic Criteria

1. Central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) is a generic term for hearing anomalies that result from atypical processing of auditory information in the brain.  (Since the term APD is used in the NZ Guidelines on APD it will continue to be used in reports). 

​

2. Audiologists are the only professionals qualified to diagnose CAPD. 

​

3. An audiologist’s diagnosis of CAPD is a clinical opinion based on presenting symptoms, case history, parent and teacher questionnaires, other available assessments and supporting information, hearing assessment, clinical observation, and specific tests of central auditory processing.  
Whereas some developmental disorders are diagnosed largely on the basis of symptoms, tests of auditory processing add more rigour to diagnosis of CAPD. Scores on tests of auditory processing provide guidance but are not absolute determinants of diagnosis. The following norm-referenced criteria provide useful guidance. (Note that norms may be expressed in various formats such as standard deviations, standard scores, percentiles.) 

​

• Performance below published norm-referenced cutoff levels for at least one ear on at least two different behavioural central auditory tests, or  

• performance reliably below published norm-referenced cutoff levels on only one test accompanied by significant functional difficulty in auditory behaviours reliant on the process assessed, or  

• performance significantly and reliably below published norm-referenced cut-off levels on only one test.The diagnostic label of central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) should be applied judiciously. 

​​​

4. The diagnostic label of central auditory processing disorder (CAPD) should be applied judiciously. 

​

5. Identify or exclude other possible hearing disorders. 

​

6. Be alert for signs of central nervous system (CNS) disorders.  

​

7. Strive for early identification and intervention. 

​

8. Cognitive and language confounds need not prevent assessment and intervention. 

​

9. Comorbidities should not prevent assessment and intervention. 

​

10. In most cases of CAPD it is inadvisable to attempt to specify sites of lesion within the central auditory nervous system (CANS). 

​

11. Although electrophysiological testing methods have not yet demonstrated adequate predictive efficiency for diagnosis of CAPD they play an important role in detecting or ruling out some other conditions and are valuable tools for auditory processing research. 

​

References 

Keith, W. J., Purdy, S. C., Baily, M. R., & Kay, F. M. (2019). New Zealand Guidelines on Auditory Processing Disorder. New Zealand Audiological Society. https://www.audiology.org.nz/ 

 

Wilson, W. J., & Arnott, W. (2013). Using different criteria to diagnose (central) auditory processing disorder: how big a difference does it make? Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 56(1), 63-70.